The press industry’s consumer complaints body, IPSO, has announced a new “compulsory” arbitration scheme for national newspapers. This is the third version of the IPSO arbitration scheme. The first two versions have had no takers and the third is unlikely to be any more successful. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Tag: Arbitration
IPSO has announced what it falsely claims to be a new “Leveson-style” arbitration scheme in its latest attempt to mislead the public into believing that it is implementing the recommendations of the Leveson Report and providing access to justice to members of the public. Continue reading
The war between the government and the press over section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, or rather between the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) and Impress, is artificial and wholly unnecessary. Continue reading
Once upon a time, a long, long time ago, there was an investigation into press behaviour. Sir Brian Leveson heard from witnesses, tale upon tale of poor press conduct, and ultimately issued a plethora of sensible recommendations for press regulation with a view to ensure that the watchdog and bloodhound of society that is the press, could no longer savage the rights and reputations of the public. Continue reading
Representatives of the local and regional press continue to express concern about the key Leveson recommendation that a self-regulator must offer an “arbitration service”. The purpose of this recommendation is to provide “access to justice” for complainants whilst reducing the burden of legal costs for publishers. Continue reading
Lord Justice Leveson’s “inquisitorial” arbitration scheme for media claims is moving closer to implementation. The word inquisitorial conjures up images of medieval magistrates acting as prosecutor and jury, and the scheme was recently criticised by David Allen Green in The New Statesman as leaving parties with “no safeguards”. Is this concern justified? Continue reading
According to Lord Justice Leveson, one of the key requirements of a new independent press regulator is an “arbitration service”. The recommendation is that the regulator should provide “an arbitral process in relation to civil legal claims against subscribers, drawing on independent legal experts of high reputation and ability on a cost-only basis to the subscribing member” (Recommendation 22). Continue reading
One of the key recommendations of the Leveson Report is that a new independent press regulator should provide a “fair, quick and inexpensive” arbitration service. This is one of three “arms” of the new regulator: standards enforcement, complaints handling and arbitration. It is proposed that the arbitration service will deal with “civil” complaints – cases which would otherwise be the subject of Court proceedings. There is a helpful diagram in the Report (Vol 4, K, 4.3, p.1759). Continue reading
Lord Justice Leveson’s Report on the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press recommends that claims against the press be resolved fairly, quickly and cheaply by means of an arbitration scheme established by a new self-regulatory body. Continue reading
The wait is over, we now know Lord Justice Leveson has steered close to, but avoided a compulsory scheme of press regulation. The incentives to join the voluntary scheme proposed are therefore crucial. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2024 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑